Hacker News Reader

Comment by jamesrcole | Hacker News Reader

Thinking out loud, the utility of the book seems to come from it being composed of standardized, discrete units (pages). It's easier to progress through it by turning pages, and it has addressability (ability to mark pages, such as to indicate the current place you're at).

And the downsides of the bookroll -- awkwardness to progress through it, having to 'rewind' them after finishing them, and lack of addressability -- comes from them being continuous.

It's interesting to note that modern reading on the web is usually continuous (scrolling). It doesn't have the awkwardness of moving through the text that bookrolls did, as the computer handles that. But it does have the problem of lack of addressability.

View on HN

There is addressability on the web, yet creators are hell bent on removing it. the id tag lets you navigate directly to content on a web page. However, in an effort to try and find some good examples, every long form news site and magazine I checked forgoes them in favour of random class identifiers.

One major difference between reading on the web though is the mutability of the support. Content can change without notice, or simply disappear (though this has parallels with physical books).

I find the point of durability interesting, on how codices protected the paper better than scrolls, and had the side-effect of surviving longer and in harsher conditions. I believe the same cannot be said for digital supports: what are the chances that an EPUB file be readable (assuming file integrity and language liveliness) in the next couple of centuries ? Even if "digital monks" copy the contents of those books from one format to the next to ensure readability, at one point practicality of a paper printed version for long-term storage will prevail.

This is an interesting argument as we are in completely unknown territory.

As is it now we have some of the oldest scripts still readable because of pure luck (they were trapped in specific materials that preserved them, stayed in unopened cave etc.), extremely high effort (actively kept in pristine condition, backed up, repaired as needed) or wide appeal (e.g. religious books, reference books)

Basically we don't have much of the random papers circulating in markets and left lying around when their appeal was pretty small.

I think the same process will still happen with digital data, there will be a very low chance to find back the integrality of random users facebook posts, or the verge's amazon echo reviews in 4 centuries. But the work of the 'digital monks' will still be a lot easier, and I'd expect the bar to preserve any specific content to be a lot lower than what we had in the past.

Say, people's cooking recipes might survive a few centuries more, and possibly at a massive scale if a few dozens of people take the time to make that happen, where in the past this would just be unrealistic.

> I'd expect the bar to preserve any specific content to be a lot lower than what we had in the past.

At the moment, I agree.

However, as older civilizations rose and fell, their knowledge lived on in physical support, directly accessible by anyone who was taught how to read the language, therefore the assumption was that "as long as the language lives on, books are a good archiving support".

When our modern digital civilization falls [1], I'm not sure most of it would be transmittable through long-term electronic archiving supports that may be easily readable (as easily as a written book at least) by future civilizations, because not only the language has to live on, but the technology needed to access the content also has to function.

I also agree that some contents will always be more relevant to "backup". As for everything that happened on Facebook (same can be said for most social platforms), it is likely to entirely disappear with the company. One could even see it as a parallel civilization, that has no means of self-preservation other than that of their ruling entity's business interest.

[1] Jonathan Blow - Preventing the collapse of civilization - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW-SOdj4Kkk

Personally, I much prefer continuous scroll on my Kindle. It lets me keep the part that I'm focused on in the middle of the viewing area so I always have context above and below. Addressability has been superseded by the ability to search.

> Addressability has been superseded by the ability to search.

In some respects. In long-form reading on the web it can be pain to keep track of where you were up to.

And searches can be awkward--but not impossible, of course--because of multiple search results for search terms.

I can page through a web page like a book (Page Down/Up keys or spacebar) and I also can search it and jump immediately to arbitrary keywords. Being accustomed to that, I now find reading textbooks or similar to be incredibly inconvenient and non-natural despite remembering well a time when digital texts were relatively uncommon.

If I know what I'm looking for, a half-assed index and skimming doesn't cut it. I want to jump right to the relevant information.

The typical website fits on a small number of pages.

Why weren't column numbers a form of addressing?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com